Let Me Get This Straight About Impeachment Over Trump's Ukraine Phone Call

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The law says donations or contributions. Try reading the law instead of assuming what it says.

Providing a service is a contribution.

Read the law. It says no such thing. Libtards read things in laws, transcripts, and articles that simply do not exist, yet swear it is there!

Where is the quid pro quo in the transcript of Trump's call to the Ukrainian president? Libtards swear it is there. Shifty Schiff swears it is there. Anyone with a room temp IQ can easily see that it is NOT there.

Types of contributions - FEC.gov

And the phone call is not the only evidence.

Great source, but it does not prove your allegation. Information about criminal wrongdoing is NOT mentioned anywhere, dumbass!

Try reading the actual law.

I'm crazy because you can't fucking read?

 

[Faun]

Had he done that, it would have been illegal. He cannot hire an American company to hire a foreign national.

Hillary hired Fusion GPS
Fusion GPS hired Steele

where was he from again?

is this where we go "but this is different"?

Great, all you have to do now is prove she knew, and was involved with, Fusion GPS was hiring a foreign national and you can get her charged with a crime. Just think about what a hero you will be to the right if you can do that.

great. now apply that logic to most trump attacks.

seems proof is a one way street.

Nope, we have proof Trump solicited a foreign national to investigate Biden. We also have proof that Trump withheld the $390 million in security assistance for his campaign.

That is not a foreign national, but a head of state. I am sure that means nothing to you because you are the consummate imbecile.

LOLOL

You dumbfuck...

Foreign nationals - FEC.gov

Definition

The following groups and individuals are considered "foreign nationals" and are subject to the prohibition:

• Foreign citizens (not including dual citizens of the United States);

• Immigrants who are not lawfully admitted for permanent residence;

• Foreign governments;

• Foreign political parties;

• Foreign corporations;

• Foreign associations;

• Foreign partnerships; and

• Any other foreign principal, as defined at 22 U.S.C. § 611(b), which includes a foreign organization or “other combination of persons organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.”

​

 

[Faun]

I'm not letting anyone pass. Trump solicited aid from a foreign national. That's illegal.

Hillary solicited aid from Fusion GPS. They're an American firm and that's legal.

Fusion GPS solicited aid from a foreign national at Hillary's request for dirt on her opponent in an election That's illegal.

The President of the United States asked for cooperation from a foreign head of state, and that is perfectly legal.

That may be illegal. That would be a crime by Fusion GPS if it is.

The president cannot solicit foreign aid for his or her own campaign.

but he is responsible for defending the country from corruption,,, and running for office doesnt protect anyone from that,,,

We've been through this. The only corruption Trump asked Zelensky to look into involved Biden and the DNC server.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Read the transcript, you illiterate libtard!

Great, quote any other corruption trump asked to have looked into....

 

[Faun]

I'm pretty certain it's illegal to hire a foreign national to contribute in any way to a candidate's campaign.

There are exceptions regarding foreign nationals if they volunteer; but even then, there are strict guidelines to what capacity they can participate to ensure they don't cross the line into contributing.

Foreign nationals - FEC.gov

Volunteer activity
Generally, an individual (including a foreign national) may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer "exemption" as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone. The Commission has addressed applicability of this exemption to several situations involving volunteer activity by a foreign national, as explained below.​

The salient terms in all this are "contribution", and "influence". Foreigners cannot contribute, and cannot control or have significant influence over a campaign. However:

Experts told me that when it comes to campaign finance law, hiring or contracting a foreigner to do services for a campaign is allowed. “You can pay a foreign national to provide you with services, so a campaign, for instance, could have a campaign attorney who is a Canadian citizen,” Levinson said. “As long as you pay fair market rates for those services, that’s not what the federal campaign act says is prohibited. That’s just a fair exchange of money for services.”

If this kind of seems like a loophole, experts pointed out that it would be really hard to run a campaign otherwise. It would mean having to worry if the campaign signs you printed came from a foreign company, or if the catering firm you hired had foreign workers.

If a campaign is paying someone for work or services, they’re being compensated. But where that doesn’t happen, and a campaign is accepting a contribution — or “thing of value” — from a foreign government, the question then is what’s in it for them?​

It would be too funny if hiring Steele directly would be prohibited, but involving a middleman would make it all hunky-dory. That would be too obvious a loophole making the whole regulation perfectly toothless. Anyway, hiring a contractor at fair market rates is not a contribution, and as long as this subcontractor has no influence over what's done with the material, there is no campaign finance law violation - as far as I can discern. Of course, you'll probably find folks arguing the opposite, and most assuredly you can find Trumpletons screeching "foul."

Whatever, Trump's solicitation of dirt in his call to Zelensky is as clear a violation as it gets, and it is perfectly ludicrous that the sycophants at DoJ strained to find there was no violation because they couldn't determine the value of the solicited dirt. What a crock...

He didn't solicit "dirt", dumbass!

Of course he did. He already believes Biden acted illegally. Therefore, asking Zelensky to investigate the matter is merely the formality to lead to an indictment, otherwise known in campaign terms as "dirt."

Why does Biden get a pass because he is a candidate for the Democrat nomination? It would seem that there would be a deliberate ignorance of the law in that case. putting Biden above the law.

No one says Biden gets a pass. What is said is that Trump, a candidate running for office, can't solicit foreign aid to find dirt on him. Amazingly, you still can't comprehend that.

 

[Faun]

Providing a service is a contribution.

Read the law. It says no such thing. Libtards read things in laws, transcripts, and articles that simply do not exist, yet swear it is there!

Where is the quid pro quo in the transcript of Trump's call to the Ukrainian president? Libtards swear it is there. Shifty Schiff swears it is there. Anyone with a room temp IQ can easily see that it is NOT there.

Types of contributions - FEC.gov

And the phone call is not the only evidence.

Great source, but it does not prove your allegation. Information about criminal wrongdoing is NOT mentioned anywhere, dumbass!

Try reading the actual law.

I'm crazy because you can't fucking read?

No, you're crazy because I already posted the law which does describe the criminal wrongdoing you idiotically claim is missing; AND the definition of "contribution" which shows Trump broke the law.

 

[rightwinger]

Impeachment can’t succeed without Republican support

The question is, will there be any political fallout for Republicans who look the other way on political corruption and abuse of office as long as their party benefits?

Trumps handling of this affair has been inept and arrogant. Will there be a political price to pay if Republicans accept it

You know, goofy, as of now that's almost 190k postings, and more than a decade you've been hanging out on here, and still you can't get the terminology right:

"Impeachment can’t succeed without Republican support[.]"

How is that?

Of course, there will be a political price to pay, as some reasonable independents might abandon the Trump camp. Just as there will be a political price to pay for the impeachment proceedings, as some moderate liberals will leave the Democratic camp. Anyone asserting they are capable of quantifying these effects (and others) is probably lying.

Apart from that, there's the question as to what the nation is willing to accept by way of corruption and political shenanigans, not to mention loutish, embarrassing, inept behavior on the world stage. There's currently a clean-up crew at work, offering to the nation a view on something better. Let's see whether the nation is willing to go for that, or surrender whatever decency there may have been to the sordid spectacle around the Lout in Chief. If it's the latter, buckle your seat belts, for it's going to be a bumpy ride. "Is there a price to pay?" Yeah, there is, and a percentage point or two in the polls won't even begin to describe it.

It appears you are just fucking stupid

The Democrats do not have the two thirds majority in the Senate to impeach without Senate Republicans supporting the the impeachment

It’s simple math you fucking retard

 

[BluesLegend]

No one says Biden gets a pass. What is said is that Trump, a candidate running for office, can't solicit foreign aid to find dirt on him. Amazingly, you still can't comprehend that.

Obama did, he asked the Russians its on video and a hot mic where was your faux rage then?

 

[rightwinger]

I'm pretty certain it's illegal to hire a foreign national to contribute in any way to a candidate's campaign.

There are exceptions regarding foreign nationals if they volunteer; but even then, there are strict guidelines to what capacity they can participate to ensure they don't cross the line into contributing.

Foreign nationals - FEC.gov

Volunteer activity
Generally, an individual (including a foreign national) may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer "exemption" as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone. The Commission has addressed applicability of this exemption to several situations involving volunteer activity by a foreign national, as explained below.​

The salient terms in all this are "contribution", and "influence". Foreigners cannot contribute, and cannot control or have significant influence over a campaign. However:

Experts told me that when it comes to campaign finance law, hiring or contracting a foreigner to do services for a campaign is allowed. “You can pay a foreign national to provide you with services, so a campaign, for instance, could have a campaign attorney who is a Canadian citizen,” Levinson said. “As long as you pay fair market rates for those services, that’s not what the federal campaign act says is prohibited. That’s just a fair exchange of money for services.”

If this kind of seems like a loophole, experts pointed out that it would be really hard to run a campaign otherwise. It would mean having to worry if the campaign signs you printed came from a foreign company, or if the catering firm you hired had foreign workers.

If a campaign is paying someone for work or services, they’re being compensated. But where that doesn’t happen, and a campaign is accepting a contribution — or “thing of value” — from a foreign government, the question then is what’s in it for them?​

It would be too funny if hiring Steele directly would be prohibited, but involving a middleman would make it all hunky-dory. That would be too obvious a loophole making the whole regulation perfectly toothless. Anyway, hiring a contractor at fair market rates is not a contribution, and as long as this subcontractor has no influence over what's done with the material, there is no campaign finance law violation - as far as I can discern. Of course, you'll probably find folks arguing the opposite, and most assuredly you can find Trumpletons screeching "foul."

Whatever, Trump's solicitation of dirt in his call to Zelensky is as clear a violation as it gets, and it is perfectly ludicrous that the sycophants at DoJ strained to find there was no violation because they couldn't determine the value of the solicited dirt. What a crock...

He didn't solicit "dirt", dumbass!

Of course he did. He already believes Biden acted illegally. Therefore, asking Zelensky to investigate the matter is merely the formality to lead to an indictment, otherwise known in campaign terms as "dirt."

Why does Biden get a pass because he is a candidate for the Democrat nomination? It would seem that there would be a deliberate ignorance of the law in that case. putting Biden above the law.

Biden does not get a pass

Trump has controlled the Justice Department for almost three years. He has yet to file any charges against Biden or his son

That investigation would be separate from any impeachment process

 

[Olde Europe]

Impeachment can’t succeed without Republican support

The question is, will there be any political fallout for Republicans who look the other way on political corruption and abuse of office as long as their party benefits?

Trumps handling of this affair has been inept and arrogant. Will there be a political price to pay if Republicans accept it

You know, goofy, as of now that's almost 190k postings, and more than a decade you've been hanging out on here, and still you can't get the terminology right:

"Impeachment can’t succeed without Republican support[.]"

How is that?

Of course, there will be a political price to pay, as some reasonable independents might abandon the Trump camp. Just as there will be a political price to pay for the impeachment proceedings, as some moderate liberals will leave the Democratic camp. Anyone asserting they are capable of quantifying these effects (and others) is probably lying.

Apart from that, there's the question as to what the nation is willing to accept by way of corruption and political shenanigans, not to mention loutish, embarrassing, inept behavior on the world stage. There's currently a clean-up crew at work, offering to the nation a view on something better. Let's see whether the nation is willing to go for that, or surrender whatever decency there may have been to the sordid spectacle around the Lout in Chief. If it's the latter, buckle your seat belts, for it's going to be a bumpy ride. "Is there a price to pay?" Yeah, there is, and a percentage point or two in the polls won't even begin to describe it.

It appears you are just fucking stupid

The Democrats do not have the two thirds majority in the Senate to impeach without Senate Republicans supporting the the impeachment

It’s simple math you fucking retard

As I said before, almost 190k posts, more than a decade on this board, and too ignorant to know the different between impeachment (House) and conviction (removal from office - Senate). How about you blab less, think more, and try less often to insult everybody's intelligence? But then, since even punctuation is too hard for you, what hope is there?

 

[rightwinger]

Impeachment can’t succeed without Republican support

The question is, will there be any political fallout for Republicans who look the other way on political corruption and abuse of office as long as their party benefits?

Trumps handling of this affair has been inept and arrogant. Will there be a political price to pay if Republicans accept it

You know, goofy, as of now that's almost 190k postings, and more than a decade you've been hanging out on here, and still you can't get the terminology right:

"Impeachment can’t succeed without Republican support[.]"

How is that?

Of course, there will be a political price to pay, as some reasonable independents might abandon the Trump camp. Just as there will be a political price to pay for the impeachment proceedings, as some moderate liberals will leave the Democratic camp. Anyone asserting they are capable of quantifying these effects (and others) is probably lying.

Apart from that, there's the question as to what the nation is willing to accept by way of corruption and political shenanigans, not to mention loutish, embarrassing, inept behavior on the world stage. There's currently a clean-up crew at work, offering to the nation a view on something better. Let's see whether the nation is willing to go for that, or surrender whatever decency there may have been to the sordid spectacle around the Lout in Chief. If it's the latter, buckle your seat belts, for it's going to be a bumpy ride. "Is there a price to pay?" Yeah, there is, and a percentage point or two in the polls won't even begin to describe it.

It appears you are just fucking stupid

The Democrats do not have the two thirds majority in the Senate to impeach without Senate Republicans supporting the the impeachment

It’s simple math you fucking retard

As I said before, almost 190k posts, more than a decade on this board, and too ignorant to know the different between impeachment (House) and conviction (removal from office - Senate). How about you blab less, think more, and try less often to insult everybody's intelligence? But then, since even punctuation is too hard for you, what hope is there?

The entire process of impeachment and conviction are commonly known as IMPEACHMENT

 

[Paulie]

No shit. But the president asked for info about a person who may have committed a crime. Adding in that he’s a candidate for president or “political opponent” is irrelevant. The executive branch is allowed to request information to investigate corruption. I’m not even trying to defend trump on this, I couldn’t possibly care less who sits in that office anymore. If you want joe fucking Biden to be your president you can have at it. At this point I would hope there’s no one left who would want biden to be the president after everything we’ve learned about him but I’m sure there’s still plenty of you who don’t care. I’m just glad some corruption has been exposed. If trump goes down for exposing it then that’s good enough for me. You can go back to fighting over dem and repub now

A candidate is not allowed by law to solicit foreign aid for their campaign. Trump cannot hide behind the Executive branch to violate the law.

yet the hillary campaign paid steele. where was he from again?

And yet, she didn't. She paid Fusion GPS, an American company. There's no law against that.

so great. trump can setup a company to do this for him.

if you're gonna let one side bypass this for any stated reason, you must allow all. period. end of story. this one sided shit is killing us all and people are so quick to put the noose around their neck and kick out their own chair because they hate the other side so much they can't see they're really looking in a mirror.

As long as Trump the candidate does it, it would be fine.

When Trump the president uses the power of the Fed Govt to do it, that changes things.

Surely you can see the difference...right?

I’m not sure this is correct and if it is it makes literally no sense. How can the president be prevented from investigating corruption? Why would we even want that?

 

[busybee01]

No, Obama just illegally spied on Americans, reporters, media, US SENATIORS, & USSC JUSTICES...

No, Obama just weaponized and used the IRS against Americans legally opposing his re-election

You mean- gasp- he made them actually follow the rules? OH MY GOD, that's terrible.

No, Barry just 'pimped' out our military to Al Qaeda, who slaughtered 3,000 Americans in 1 day, & then the Nobel Peace Prize winner invaded Syria, leaving troops there on his way out

Okay, now you are going to crazy land... you are a crazy person, aren't you.. yes, you are.

Negative. Koskinen admitted the IRS targeted Americans after being caught committing Perjury. He was spared / protected from Indictment by Holder.

You just got busted spinning lies, snowflake!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...6a0ada-b987-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html

"The Internal Revenue Service on Friday apologized for targeting groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, confirming long-standing accusations by some conservatives that their applications for tax-exempt status were being improperly delayed and scrutinized."

So they were delayed and scrutinized... Did bother to read after that? It wasn't because they were Conservative, it was because they were trying to stop a flood applications for a certain type of tax exemptions because of the lack of resources... But who has cut resources to IRS, that would be the GOP...

So GOP indirectly through there own actions got conservative groups investigated...

If you can, try reading the article where Koskinen and Lerner admitted to improperly targeting Conservatives. Try reading how Koskinen was caught lying under oath before finally admitting it.

FAIL!

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration also found that liberal groups were targeted by using words like "Progressive," "Green Energy," "Medical Marijuana" and "Occupy.". He identified 146 possible cases and confirmed 83 of them.

IRS unfairly targeted liberal groups, too, Treasury Department watchdog finds

 

[busybee01]

[

So let me see if I understand the Democrats' position on this: Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid from Ukraine if Ukraine did not fire the prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian company that was paying Biden's drug-using, Navy-discharged-for-drug-use son Hunter $50K per month--and that's no big deal, nothing to see here. But, Donald Trump's request to Ukraine that Ukraine investigate the suspicious, apparently corrupt firing of that prosecutor is an impeachable offense!

Can you imagine what Democrats would be saying if Trump had a troubled son, if that troubled son were hired by a Ukrainian company for the amazing salary of $50K per month (even though the son possessed no job skills that would justify such a salary), if a Ukrainian prosecutor began to investigate the company that was paying Trump's troubled son such an exorbitant salary, if Trump then threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid to Ukraine if the prosecutor weren't fired, and if Ukraine then fired the prosecutor? They would justifiably argue that this smelled to high heaven of corruption.

So the Democrats want to impeach Trump because he wanted Ukraine to investigate what clearly appears to have been a case of corruption involving Joe Biden, his son, and the Ukrainian company, and the previous Ukrainian government that fired the prosecutor.

Did Biden, as Vice President, attempt to withhold aid until the Ukrainians agreed to dig-up dirt on a domestic political rival ?

No? Well... there ya go... there's the difference... that's what makes it Impeachable.

Mic drop.

---------

Besides: "The other guy did it too" is a 5th grade recess-yard excuse; best left there.

There is a difference... You want to support a Russian appointed prosecutor...

The prosecutor wasn't a political rival, he was a Russian lacky...

Biden was doing it for US & Allies National Security, Trump was planting dirt on the he running mate using US National Security as a bargaining chip..

You are looking pretty stupid picking up that mic...

LOL. Biden was doing it to enrich his son. Wake the fuck up.

Absolutely no evidence of it. But then that never stopped Trump and his supporters from making baseless accusations.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I’m not sure this is correct and if it is it makes literally no sense. How can the president be prevented from investigating corruption? Why would we even want that?

The president can investigate corruption if there is a valid reason to do so.

Doing so just to beat a political opponent seems like not a valid reason.

Isn't that what Obama has been accused of doing in regards to Trump?

 

[gipper]

[

So let me see if I understand the Democrats' position on this: Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid from Ukraine if Ukraine did not fire the prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian company that was paying Biden's drug-using, Navy-discharged-for-drug-use son Hunter $50K per month--and that's no big deal, nothing to see here. But, Donald Trump's request to Ukraine that Ukraine investigate the suspicious, apparently corrupt firing of that prosecutor is an impeachable offense!

Can you imagine what Democrats would be saying if Trump had a troubled son, if that troubled son were hired by a Ukrainian company for the amazing salary of $50K per month (even though the son possessed no job skills that would justify such a salary), if a Ukrainian prosecutor began to investigate the company that was paying Trump's troubled son such an exorbitant salary, if Trump then threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid to Ukraine if the prosecutor weren't fired, and if Ukraine then fired the prosecutor? They would justifiably argue that this smelled to high heaven of corruption.

So the Democrats want to impeach Trump because he wanted Ukraine to investigate what clearly appears to have been a case of corruption involving Joe Biden, his son, and the Ukrainian company, and the previous Ukrainian government that fired the prosecutor.

Did Biden, as Vice President, attempt to withhold aid until the Ukrainians agreed to dig-up dirt on a domestic political rival ?

No? Well... there ya go... there's the difference... that's what makes it Impeachable.

Mic drop.

---------

Besides: "The other guy did it too" is a 5th grade recess-yard excuse; best left there.

There is a difference... You want to support a Russian appointed prosecutor...

The prosecutor wasn't a political rival, he was a Russian lacky...

Biden was doing it for US & Allies National Security, Trump was planting dirt on the he running mate using US National Security as a bargaining chip..

You are looking pretty stupid picking up that mic...

LOL. Biden was doing it to enrich his son. Wake the fuck up.

Absolutely no evidence of it. But then that never stopped Trump and his supporters from making baseless accusations.

Yep. Trump is one corrupt MFer. Biden is clean as the driven snow. LOL.

 

[busybee01]

Oh look, another mindless drone parroting the party talking points yet is too stupid to know what the purpose of a Board of Directors.

Allow me to educate you just a tad...

Look up Charles Scharf. He is the Chairman for the NY Ballet Board of Directors even though he does know shit about ballet and he was on the Microsoft Board even though he does not know shit about software development.

_______

I don't know how you could establish that you are a half-wit any more completely than by this post. Yes, very knowledgeable and accomplished people are put on Boards without expertise in that specific area. They are put there for their known good judgment and accomplishments in general.

But, since Hunter Biden has neither good judgment or accomplishments---only a father for VEEP--it is obvious to all but morons that is why, the ONLY reason why, he was put on this Board.

And, asshole, you might want to ask yourself what justified his huge pay as well. The members on the Board of EXXON don't make much more than what Hunter Biden got for this scam with his dumb-ass father.

)______-

I am glad that I could educate you on what a Board of Directors is and is not. We are making progress.

How did his pay compare to the other members of that companies Board of Directors? That is all that really matters, how it compares to a different company is meaningless

Dude....STOP!

Democrats have come out to say they have a very serious problem with a son working for a notorious Ukraine criminal and his corrupt energy company known for working with Putin and stood to greatly benefit from Crimea's annexation by Russia....WHILE the VP was the US / President's Point Man on Ukraine foreign policy & plan!

The fact that you are an unapologetic, Trump-hating, Criminal Democrat defender ... When even other Democrats won't even do that ... Says it all!

Cool story Bro!

Ukraine Jobs Board;

OPENING: BOARD OF DIRECTOR
- Position available on Board of corrupt Ukraine Energy company known for working with Vladimir Putin & Stands to make billions once Putin Annexed Crimea.

PAY: $50,000+ Per Month....

MANDATORY QUALIFICATIONS:
- American
- Kicked out of US military for drug use
- Average Lawyer
- ... Oh, & father must be VP of the US, newly appointed Point Man / decision-maker on all things Ukraine...


If you're just the right fit it's an awesome job...

Bwuhahahaha

There is nothing illegal about it. Kushner has used his relationship to Trump to further his business. The investigation into Burisma was closed by the time Biden joined the board.

 

[busybee01]

Yes you make the perfect dupe.

Could you please explain how you can hold these two beliefs in your head? Trump is the fucking worst EVER. Obama is fucking GREAT.

Never remember Obama going on crazy Twitter Rants attacking members of his own party.

Never remember Obama opening concentration camps.

Never remember Obama enriching himself in the presidency by steering money to his own businesses.

Just because you're a nihilist, doesn't mean the rest of us have to be. I'm sure you'll still be miserable no matter who the president is.

Well Joey I have told you over and over, don't concern yourself with what Donny tweets. Man up son.

Obama had the same camps Donny does, you just don’t know this because you consume only MSM media. Ears deported far more people than has Donnie. Is this news to you?

Ears is doing a good job enriching himself now. His donors on Wall Street are really making him wealthy.

Nope. We just know, thru the facts of both situations, the situations were completely different during Obama vs Trump.... they are not the same, even though kids ended up in cages under both.

Obama should have been impeached and removed over Fast&Furious, arming Isis, invading both Syria and Libya, murdering an American in a drone strike, lying repeatedly over Ocare, lying about Benghazi, etc...

I’m fine with impeaching Donny, but I recognize that his predecessors should have been too.

That is so much bullshit. A similar operation to Fast and Furious was run out of the ATF under George W Bush. He did not arm ISIS. Invading Syria was justifiable and even Libya was though not as much. Killing terrorists with drone strikes is not murder. That person has no rights whatsoever. Trump and the Republicans lied in their attempts to get rid of Obamacare. if lying was a impeachable offense, there would be 1,000 or more counts of impeachment against Trump.

None of his predecessors should have been impeached.

 

[gipper]

[

So let me see if I understand the Democrats' position on this: Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid from Ukraine if Ukraine did not fire the prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian company that was paying Biden's drug-using, Navy-discharged-for-drug-use son Hunter $50K per month--and that's no big deal, nothing to see here. But, Donald Trump's request to Ukraine that Ukraine investigate the suspicious, apparently corrupt firing of that prosecutor is an impeachable offense!

Can you imagine what Democrats would be saying if Trump had a troubled son, if that troubled son were hired by a Ukrainian company for the amazing salary of $50K per month (even though the son possessed no job skills that would justify such a salary), if a Ukrainian prosecutor began to investigate the company that was paying Trump's troubled son such an exorbitant salary, if Trump then threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid to Ukraine if the prosecutor weren't fired, and if Ukraine then fired the prosecutor? They would justifiably argue that this smelled to high heaven of corruption.

So the Democrats want to impeach Trump because he wanted Ukraine to investigate what clearly appears to have been a case of corruption involving Joe Biden, his son, and the Ukrainian company, and the previous Ukrainian government that fired the prosecutor.

Did Biden, as Vice President, attempt to withhold aid until the Ukrainians agreed to dig-up dirt on a domestic political rival ?

No? Well... there ya go... there's the difference... that's what makes it Impeachable.

Mic drop.

---------

Besides: "The other guy did it too" is a 5th grade recess-yard excuse; best left there.

There is a difference... You want to support a Russian appointed prosecutor...

The prosecutor wasn't a political rival, he was a Russian lacky...

Biden was doing it for US & Allies National Security, Trump was planting dirt on the he running mate using US National Security as a bargaining chip..

You are looking pretty stupid picking up that mic...

LOL. Biden was doing it to enrich his son. Wake the fuck up.

Absolutely no evidence of it. But then that never stopped Trump and his supporters from making baseless accusations.

Since when do you require evidence? You believe Russia hacked our election and colluded with Donny, but there is no evidence.

Why do you believe conspiracy theories? Did Rachel inflame you?

 

[gipper]

Yes you make the perfect dupe.

Could you please explain how you can hold these two beliefs in your head? Trump is the fucking worst EVER. Obama is fucking GREAT.

Never remember Obama going on crazy Twitter Rants attacking members of his own party.

Never remember Obama opening concentration camps.

Never remember Obama enriching himself in the presidency by steering money to his own businesses.

Just because you're a nihilist, doesn't mean the rest of us have to be. I'm sure you'll still be miserable no matter who the president is.

Well Joey I have told you over and over, don't concern yourself with what Donny tweets. Man up son.

Obama had the same camps Donny does, you just don’t know this because you consume only MSM media. Ears deported far more people than has Donnie. Is this news to you?

Ears is doing a good job enriching himself now. His donors on Wall Street are really making him wealthy.

Nope. We just know, thru the facts of both situations, the situations were completely different during Obama vs Trump.... they are not the same, even though kids ended up in cages under both.

Obama should have been impeached and removed over Fast&Furious, arming Isis, invading both Syria and Libya, murdering an American in a drone strike, lying repeatedly over Ocare, lying about Benghazi, etc...

I’m fine with impeaching Donny, but I recognize that his predecessors should have been too.

That is so much bullshit. A similar operation to Fast and Furious was run out of the ATF under George W Bush. He did not arm ISIS. Invading Syria was justifiable and even Libya was though not as much. Killing terrorists with drone strikes is not murder. That person has no rights whatsoever. Trump and the Republicans lied in their attempts to get rid of Obamacare. if lying was a impeachable offense, there would be 1,000 or more counts of impeachment against Trump.

None of his predecessors should have been impeached.

All wrong. Stop getting your news from MSNBC.

 

[busybee01]

It really had nothing to do with Obama's Administration policy. It's all about Trumpybears' pattern of corrupt behavior and shakedown of foreign governments for his own political gain.

So Trump's wanting Ukraine to investigate clearly apparent corruption is "corrupt behavior"? How would you characterize Biden's threat to withhold $1 billion in aid if Ukraine didn't fire the prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian company that was, for some unfathomable reason, paying his loser son $50K per month? What would you call that?

Trump regularly threatens to withhold federal money. The Obama Administration had every right to ensure that federal dollars are not stolen by corrupt officials. Biden was correct to do what he did. Ukraine had no reason to investigate Biden and he remained on the board even after his father left office. Even a former prosecutor who succeeded Shokin said that Hunter broke no Ukrainian laws.